Today, a very promising and successful Democratic, female politician was shot in the head FROM BEHIND. She’s alive. From the last news I read, 5 people are dead, including a nine year old child. This same Democratic politician had previously pointed out that violent rhetoric in politics has consequences, citing Sarah Palin’s scope targets on a map as an example.
Several blogs, news reports etc. have me wondering. There seems to be a rush to connect this particular person to something. I think it’s too soon to know in this particular case, but I do think there has been an increase in political violence and violent political rhetoric since Obama was elected.
During the run up to the Iraq war, I don’t remember any Republican politicians getting harangued at town hall meetings. During the truly awful time in Iraq of 2006, I don’t remember anyone vandalizing politicians offices or homes. During the truly awful, deadly surge of 2007, I don’t remember any politician getting SHOT IN THE FUCKING HEAD. During all that time there were anti-war protests and people writing and advocating against the surge. Hell, Obama made it his initial point in running for president.
The only people who died in that time period were American service members, Iraqi civilians and military personnel from the coalition of the willing.
There were millions of people angry about that. But they didn’t threaten or kill any politicians. Hell, Hillary voted for the AUMF and ran for president, as did McCain.
What has changed? Why didn’t we have heated town hall meetings with recordings and cellphone pictures and clips plastered all over the news of angry anti-war protesters haranguing their representatives?
Perhaps it was because the media, especially talk radio was all for the war, making the arguments and excuses and cheerleading forever on the airwaves? And when it came to HCR, those same enterprises were on the other side? And they knew how to whip up their audiences against something just as they had for something (the surge)?
I think the 27% crazification factor has grown. It’s now at about 33% plus. People in this category of political activism or just voters have the ability to be moved by simple lies. They believe authority figures before they believe honest citizens, like me, or like the Democratic representative who was SHOT IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD today.
She made the connection about violent rhetoric. While some say it’s to soon to make a connection, her father already has. He named the Tea Party as known enemies. Over HCR.
I remember reading about her as an up and coming Democrat. While I don’t agree with her policy opinions completely, I read about her and thought she was a pragmatist — which I admire — Obama, Jordan, Garnet Coleman Jessica Farrar — are all pragmatists that I agree with, among others. I took note of her.
When we got home from our errands today and I checked on the blogs I follow — my first reaction was why? Why her?
She was targeted. It’s that simple.
It seems clear to me that there is more passion about changing the health care system in this country so it helps more people than there is about people — including our own — dying in other countries. There is more passion about smacking a black president in the face than there is about all of the money wasted through graft and irresponsibility in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There is more passion about this Teabaggery — something 37% see in a good light, 43% see in a bad light, and 13% never heard of — something only 29% claim to be a part of and a whopping 61% are not — gets all of this time on every channel — even PBS. It’s just a shiny abject to fill the day’s news. It wasn’t the same with opposition to the war in Iraq. Overwhelming public disagreement went unreported for the most part.
But to come back around, a very promising female Democrat, who had been specifically targeted by Sarah Palin is now hopefully recovering in a hospital in Tucson.
Where is the equivalent examples from anti-war protesters? This HCR fight and the 2010 election is now bloody, and deadly.